Followers of my site have had differing views of Snowden. Most readers, like most Amerikans, accept him as what he presented himself as – a genuine whistleblower that had a Damascus Road conversion to patriotic sentiment, disagreeing only on whether he was a “traitor” or “patriot.” Few and far between are the thinking readers willing to accept the possibility of the depths of deception in such affairs, but as fellow philosophers know, basic logic and critical thinking, some years in media analysis and basic knowledge of espionage and geo-politics will provide a thinker with the requisite skills to sift wheat from chaff in the “news.”
Now, having revealed he was a trained CIA operative, and not just an analyst, Snowden has called into question his entire whistleblower back story (that we questioned all along). In other words, Snowden has in effect said, “I wasn’t really an analyst, I was a professional liar.” Only a fool would continue to believe something already questionable from a now admitted liar, yet the theater of media operations will continue on foisting Snowden in our faces unabated, as full spectrum dominance must first and foremost control minds and opinions through Infowar.
My thesis is to ignore the minutiae and details, which only serve to distract, making the entire discussion about Snowden, Snowden, Snowden. Meanwhile, no NSA major programs have been halted or ceased. No revelation from Snowden so far was anything that wasn’t already known! This aspect is a huge key – whistleblowers presumably reveal something hidden that endangers them, leading to Snowden’s attempts to flee to China, Russia, etc. Remember when Julian Assange was holed up in Britain? How absurd is it that Mi5 couldn’t get to Assange, while trapped under house arrest in the UK? Likewise with bin Laden being interviewed by the major networks while on the run, now Snowden who feared for his life, meets with Brian Williams and wants to come back to the US. Why not? His revelations so far have been nothing new. This, in my analysis, is what everyone seems to have forgotten. It’s not merely that there are other whistleblowers that are ignored, but that the scant few “revelations” from Snowden were already found in James Bamford’s book, The Shadow Factory, published in 2008.
Bamford wrote in 2008:
“By the summer of 1997, the PacketScopes were fully in operation. But what the AT&T engineers never counted on was a massive terrorist attack and a president’s decision to ignore existing privacy laws. By the fall of late 2001, Hayden succeeded in gaining the secret cooperation of nearly all the nation’s telecommunications giants for his warrantless eavesdropping program. Within a year, engineers were busy installing highly secret, heavily locked rooms in key AT&T switches, among them Bridgeton, New York City, and the company’s major West Coast central office in San Francisco. From then on the data – including both address and information and content – would flow through the PacketScopes directly to the NSA.” (pg. 181)
The major globalist intelligence establishment is well aware of Bamford’s books. Bamford’s book outlines the entire architecture of how the spying occurs, and it has been going on a lot longer than most thought. As I detailed in my “Robots Over Russia” article, ARPANET, the precursor to DARPANET and the Internet, was clearly designed under the strategy of utilizing these key telecom switch locations. You can see this from DARPA’s own old diagram of the locations for servers for the nascent Internet. As you can see from the graphic, the 1977 outline includes major locations such as Rutgers, RAND, NYU, XEROX, Stanford, London, etc., as well as satellite linkup. So the real revelation is actually decades older than Bamford – it is the Internet itself that is the big NSA revelation.
But back to Snowden: given Snowden’s major “leak” about PRISM was something essentially known, the fact that the public doesn’t read books, the system knew it could get away with a large media operation that exposed something already exposed. This is the biggest sign Snowden is not a legitimate character, if “Snowden” is even who he is. “Edward Snowden” is likely his cover, and as is generally the case with intelligence operations, there’s a clever pun or joke in the name chosen, with “Snowden” being a central character in Joseph Heller’s Catch 22. Likewise, there is a 2010 episode of Psych, the popular USA Network show that featured Shawn and Gus infiltrating a fake Think Tank run by an operative named “Snowden.” The goal of the think tank front in the episode involves the assassination of a prominent billionaire. For readers used to JayAnalysis, the long history of intelligence agencies using pop culture scripts for television and film will come as no surprise. Hollywood has all along been used as a propaganda vehicle, and for fans of Psych like myself, the prevalence of “twilight language” in the show is striking and hardly coincidental. This suggests the Snowden affair was planned and prepared years in advance, since Bamford’s book was 2008, the Psych episode was 2010 and Edward Snowden emerged on the star-studded media theater scene in 2013.
If you think that’s the end of the labyrinth, get ready – now there will be a Sony Pictures version of the Snowden Affair, reportedly to be directed by Oliver Stone and based on Glenn Greenwald’s book on Snowden! (I should add that the Greenwald book affair is itself sketchy, as Sibel Edmonds has shown.) The same psy ops team that brought you the pinnacle of fake news’ greatest hits, Zero Dark Thirty will be bringing you the Snowden tale. This is why I call it the theater of media operations. The goal here seems to be a classic of psychological warfare – to blend fiction and reality to such a point that the two cannot be divided. A public drowning in toxic chemicals in food and media, raised on TV and lacking in any modicum of critical thinking is utterly unable to unwrap the Chinese finger trap that is Snowden. And that is by design. However, you can rest assured that when your whistleblower becomes a movie star, just like Assange and the failed Wikileaks movie, The Whistleblower, be assured that the intelligence-controlled film powers are projecting a celluloid hero of their own making. Real whistleblowers don’t get media fandom in the theater of operations – they get ignored or killed. The theater of media operations is simply the flip side of Hollywood – it is faux opposition Infotainment for the Infowar.
At this juncture, John Young’s interview with RT concerning the controlled nature of Wikileaks thus applies equally to Snowden.